A LION’S ROAR.

Taranaki Daily News, 31 May 1924, Page 9

A LION’S ROAR.

CHARGE OF CRUELTY. GARTER THE GREAT IN COURT. ALLEGED USE OF ELECTRICITY. A irfan who would infuriate a lion purposely lias not yet -been found, but Chis remarkable charge was laid against Carter the Great at the Christchurch Court last week before Mr. E. D. Mosley, S.M. It was alleged by the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals that Carter permitted a lion to be infuriated by means of electric shocks, in the course of an act at the Theatre Royal. A plea of not guilty was entered. Mr. A. B. Hobbs appeared for the informant society, and Mr. G. T. J. Alpers appeared for the defendant. Mr. Hobbs said that the defendant was a magician. One of his illusions included the use y6f a lion, and for the purpose of the act it was necessary for the lion to show intense rage. It was submitted that in order to do that the lion was Submitted to electric shocks.

David James White, inspector of the SF.C.A., said that on Tuesday evening he went to the theatre to witness the Bhow. There he met Mr. Johnson, and they sat in the stalls. When the last act came on a lion was seen in a eager on the stage. It was pawing away at the bottom of the cage and seemed to be dreading something on the cage floor. Witness described the action of the turn, in which a girl is thrust into the lion’s cage. The lion “let out a couple -of roars” and then stood still as if terrified. For a couple of minutes the lion roard and jumped, leaping two feet off the floor, and apparently half mad with rage and terror. On Wednesday evening witness and Mr. Jonnson visited the theatre late in the evening. The manager of the ftow, Mr. Colville, took witness by the shoulder and wanted to put him out- There was a delay of five minutes or so caused by Colville’s making a fuss — which witness thought was “bluff”—and then Carter appeared and asked witness to attend the following evening’s entertainment. A DIFFERENT ACT.

The following evening witness went to the theatre, and the act was different altogether. The lion was very quite and did not leap about at •11. Later witness went on to the stage and found that there was nothing wrong with the cage. There was an electric cable running from the switchboard to the cage, and it was explained that this was used in producing the flash of light at the end of the act. Witness heard that defendant had rented part of the floor of the cage to Niven and Co’s pkce. Witness visited Niven and Co.’s place and there found some hairs, which he produced. “I had two hairs, 'but unfultimately I lost one of them.” he said. Mr. Alpers: Are they lion hairs or horse hairs’—l will say they are lion hairs. Are you a lion expert —I have been among lions before to-day. Have you.—Oh yes. I have been fax a cage of four lions. The Magistrate: I am not sure that tins is a hair at all. Witness said that it was a lion hair, but would not swear to it. He sa.d that Carter had given an undertaking that, if nothing more were '«id about the matter, electricity would not be .1 v .e animal in New Zealand. Mr. Alpers: Do you think that if the lion suffered in that cage he would walk back into it —I noticed that he was pawing at the floor and looking down. WOULD WALK INTO CAGE. Mr. Alpers said that the animal was & quite, amiable one. Witness: I don’t think you will be game to go into the cage. Mr. Alpers: Yes, I will do that I Would like to see you. Mr. Alpers. Iwill do it. Other people went into the cage and a child stroked him.—l asked Mr. Carter if he would produce the lion in court and he said that he did not want the court cleared.

The Magistrate: I might have Something to say about that. Mr. Alpers (to witness): Do you know what voltage there is in a shock received from a telephone or an electric light button?—No. There is 230 volts, the same as was used on the stage. —Five hundred volts will kill a horse. Witness held that the shock from &n electric button gave p.in, but the Magistrate held tha- rhe sensation ex perieniced was not one r.< pain. Mr. Alpers submitted that there was Do evidence on which to • anvict. They had a lion which had been doing tricks for 14 years. It an active, wellnourished animal. The lion showed different moods’ on different nights.

The Magistrate said that he entirely agreed with Mr. Alpers. The only statement as to cruelty was that the Hon appeared to be afraid. The lion was 15 years old, and was a quiet animal. That was not consistent with having undergone "pain during that time. The punishment for such an offence was up to six months’ imprisonment. It was a highly penal offence, and it was quite right that people who were cruel to animals should be punished. But the Court was satisfied that in this case no pain was inflicted. The evidence, in fact, seemed to be contrary, the case would be dismissed.